Senators Caught on Tape: "Confiscate, Confiscate, Confiscate"

www.politickernj.com...

The three female senators, who sound from the recording to be Sen. Loretta Weinberg, Sen. Sandy Cunningham and Sen. Linda Greenstein, are heard discussing the just-closed hearing.

“We needed a bill that was going to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate," said an unknown voice.

Of course, since there has been an uproar, none of the individuals involved are admitting they are the one who said it....

They go on to talk about how the purpose of confiscation is to "get the guns away from bad guys." I'll let it stay open to interpretation on who the "bad guys" really are in their opinions.... In my experience, CRIMINALS who use guns typically use stolen weapons to begin with....

Well, at least the response is staying true to form.
Deny, Deny, Deny.

Originally posted by chiefsmom
Well, at least the response is staying true to form.
Deny, Deny, Deny.

brilliant response

reply to post by CIAGypsy


nm

reply to post by CIAGypsy


Thank you!

But in all seriousness, I am really starting to wonder about all these stories lately about mic's being left on, being recorded on camera, ect. Maybe it's been going on for a while and I've just been paying more attention lately, I don't know. But it sure seems we would be having a lot of "staffer's or technical people getting fired for this type of thing.

I just wish more leftest would be honest about how they feel towards firearms. At least then we would know who the fascists were.

Originally posted by Carreau
I just wish more leftest would be honest about how they feel towards firearms. At least then we would know who the fascists were.

too many constituents?

I tend to conjecture alot, sorry.

Originally posted by Carreau
I just wish more leftest would be honest about how they feel towards firearms. At least then we would know who the fascists were.

Interesting point... So why do you think they aren't being honest about it? Because they are afraid of the political backlash from their constituents? If that's the case, don't you think that is part of the reason Americans are so jaded about their government these days?

I can't speak for you, but I'm bone tired of politicians who say one thing to get voted into office and then do the complete opposite when it's time to ante up.... And that goes for BOTH sides of the house - Republican OR Democrat. Whatever happened to standing up for what you believed in and sticking to it?

reply to post by CIAGypsy


When becoming a politician meant increasing your net worth, it stopped being a public service and became a power grab. Politicians have no obligation to their constituents, only to their money donors that enable them to stay in office/power.

Of course the anti-firearm politicians are not going to publicly state their intention because of the backlash. Just as anyone with half a brain knows that the affordable care act had nothing to do with the uninsured in this country but was another blatant power grab. The public re-elects them and we deserve exactly what we get. Frankly I'm just about at the point of not caring any longer.

I'm reading other threads right now about Benghazi and there are a dozen ATS members who are sticking up for this administration. If the administration is willing to sacrifice their own people what do you think they would do to the lowly voter? If someone is so ignorant as to support this behavior for the only reason as being on the same political team, I hope the next sacrifice is them.

reply to post by CIAGypsy


As long as they ask "Nicely" I'll give them all my Ammo... One bullet at a time that is

Every Congress since the first one has had a group that wanted to confiscate firearms.

I would actually be surprised if there wasn't anyone who wanted to.

There is also a small group that wants to get rid of the 22nd amendment and offer legislation almost every session, Harry Reid is part of that group.

Really nothing out of the ordinary.

Guilty, guilty, guilty.

Of violating the 2nd Amendment.

My 2 cents.

So, if there were three of them in the room and the word "confiscate" was said three times with none of the three admitting to say it shouldn't we just assume that each of the ladies said it once, and thereby owns the political consequences of saying it?

Originally posted by beezzer
Guilty, guilty, guilty.

Of violating the 2nd Amendment.

My 2 cents.

Nobody has violated your second amendment. Actually, the second amendment is one of the safest ones at the moment. I'd be more worried about the 1st or 14th.

This is proof of a real conspiracy, to confiscate something.

It's the women that reveal secrets the fastest; they have twice as much brains dedicated to talking than men have. It's good for the health of the nation to be up to date with the leader's agendas. Keep a microphone on them all the time, like a leash, on a dog (or reins on a horse whatever you prefer). Put a little camera on them too, call it part of the job. Have streaming Internet on their entire hour, and don't let them run off to natter in a corner in between official takes on government order.

Confiscate? We? Who is this we? Who are these three Senators taking orders from? A salesperson? It sounds like it. Do they get something for pushing a bill with "confiscate" in it?

if you asked me a year ago i would have said that you did not need all the guns in the states but after seeing all the sxxt that is going on over in america at the moment i would fight rather than hand them over .

the word treason springs to mind with your politicians over in the uk were more worried about them being involved with children and covering it up

Its simply not possible to confiscate all the guns in America.

There are over 200 million of them so do the math. How many people would it take to go house to house and take them?

They would have to hire thousands of officers and even then it would take decades.

People often ignore the obvious.

reply to post by Hopechest


No one has said they would go door to door. Outlaw privately owned firearms AFTER a national registry is employed by "Universal Background" checks. No need to go door to door when you know WHICH doors have firearms. As far as the firearms already owned and not registered, offer anyone a cash bonus through crime stoppers reporting anyone with a privately owned firearm.

Apparently stating the obvious IS required sometimes.

Originally posted by CIAGypsy

Originally posted by Carreau
I just wish more leftest would be honest about how they feel towards firearms. At least then we would know who the fascists were.

Interesting point... So why do you think they aren't being honest about it? Because they are afraid of the political backlash from their constituents? If that's the case, don't you think that is part of the reason Americans are so jaded about their government these days?

I can't speak for you, but I'm bone tired of politicians who say one thing to get voted into office and then do the complete opposite when it's time to ante up.... And that goes for BOTH sides of the house - Republican OR Democrat. Whatever happened to standing up for what you believed in and sticking to it?

Rather than get off-topic, I created a side discussion about a fix to this problem here

Of course no confirmation on who it actually is..but a right wing site claims to know that it is these three individuals..so it must be...

Intelligence is not part of the right wingers forte..parroting is what they do best. Shepard's (Fox, Jones, congressman or woman or who ever )tell them to say BAAA...sheep go BAAA..